Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-21 Thread Frans Pop
On Thursday 21 December 2006 02:46, Steve Langasek wrote: > You could argue that the package is "unfit for release" (=> sev: > serious), but then I don't see how that's consistent with asking for an > etch-ignore tag. If it's ignorable for etch, I don't see why it > wouldn't also be ignorable for

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-20 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 02:41:29PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > On Wednesday 20 December 2006 08:35, Andreas Barth wrote: > > I have yet to see the dataloss. Anyways, bugs being important doesn't > > mean they are not allowed to be fixed (and I would let such an fix > > still to Etch currently), but

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-20 Thread Andreas Barth
* Frans Pop ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061220 14:42]: > On Wednesday 20 December 2006 08:35, Andreas Barth wrote: > > I have yet to see the dataloss. Anyways, bugs being important doesn't > > mean they are not allowed to be fixed (and I would let such an fix > > still to Etch currently), but I don't thin

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-20 Thread Frans Pop
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 08:35, Andreas Barth wrote: > I have yet to see the dataloss. Anyways, bugs being important doesn't > mean they are not allowed to be fixed (and I would let such an fix > still to Etch currently), but I don't think we should wait on the fix. > So I'm downgrading to imp

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-19 Thread Andreas Barth
severity 402482 important thanks * Steve McIntyre ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061211 17:02]: > Joey wrote: > >I don't belive that this bug is actually RC: There's a workaround for > >the problem in debian-cd, and the bug's not causing any other > >problems that I know of. > > I'm happy for this to be ta

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-11 Thread Steve McIntyre
Joey wrote: >I don't belive that this bug is actually RC: There's a workaround for >the problem in debian-cd, and the bug's not causing any other >problems that I know of. I'm happy for this to be tagged etch-ignore, but it can potentially lead to data loss so I think it should stay as serious in

Bug#402482: RC?

2006-12-11 Thread Joey Hess
I don't belive that this bug is actually RC: There's a workaround for the problem in debian-cd, and the bug's not causing any other problems that I know of. -- see shy jo, fairly heavy user of gzip >> file.gz signature.asc Description: Digital signature